Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!

a) you'd be surprised at how many people require no further "proof" than "i heard it"... (bad)

b) you'd be surprised at the number of people who don't believe that biases need to be controlled in a "listening test"... (no control=bad)...

c) it wouldn't be "better", it would be "required"... (cardinal truth)

d) otherwise, it's just blather... (bad, but entertaining at times)...

You'd be surprised that I don't believe biases NEED to be controlled in a listening test to get something out of it. Sure it's better and I prefer it when possible. But I also believe some people have better ears than others. And better sound memory when something is played over and over it tends to become ingrained in ones mind. Easier to notice subtle changes. Unlike multiple audience listening tests. That said, I have built 2 theaters that knowledgeable and experienced folks continue to be astounded by the sonic and visual experience I have created without the use of controlled tests.

Are you familiar with focus groups? I am. I've been a part of focus groups in advertising with very large clients for years. They pay large sums of money to hear peoples opinions because an accurate unequivocal answer is not possible. So it's the next best thing. Do you know why they pay hundreds of thousands on these focus groups? Because they invest millions and make billions from it. Are they perfect? No. But it's good enough to weed out the smaller number of opinions and go with the masses.

What these guys are doing is the same. A group of opinions blind tested. In a semi-controlled environment. Not perfect. But useable knowledge to many.

But in your opinion anybody who conducts focus groups like Dreamworks Studios, Apple, McDonalds, Google, Johnson and Johnson - these people are paying millions for blather. Sheer entertainment.

You know, hypothetically you could look at the tested specs of say a chevy against a BMW. The Chevy might beat out the BMW in most of the testeable things, like 0-60, gas mileage, legroom, more accessories, bigger nav screen, weight, turning radius etc. But then you might find oddly, that 9 out of 10 people preferred the BMW when they drove it. Why? Because you're not testing the drive experience scientifically. It can't be tested.

The best test of all tests is the self listening test combined with ones own components in their own room. Next to that I'll take all the useable date and listening evaluations and reviews I can find on the net. And sift the data from there.

We did get together a few times so far, but it was more or less to get to know each other. Also, craig john has done some measuring of the highly modded system and some additional treatments were recommended from those measurements. We are moving slowly toward comparing stock with modded, but it is the summer and difficult to overlay the schedules or three or four busy people.

You'd be surprised that I don't believe biases NEED to be controlled in a listening test to get something out of it. Sure it's better and I prefer it when possible.

no. i'm not surprised at all...

no. it's not "better"... it's the "only way"... because it's "hard" doesn't make it invalid, and because something else is "easier" doesn't make the easy way valid... many try and make this little leap of logic, but just because many do doesn't make it valid...

you, like all other humans, are subject to biases and also have the same auditory memory issues that everyone else has...

the rest of your post isn't germane... we aren't testing "opinions" here... we are testing "fact"...

no. it's not "better"... it's the "only way"... because it's "hard" doesn't make it invalid, and because something else is "easier" doesn't make the easy way valid... many try and make this little leap of logic, but just because many do doesn't make it valid...

you, like all other humans, are subject to biases and also have the same auditory memory issues that everyone else has...

the rest of your post isn't germane... we aren't testing "opinions" here... we are testing "fact"...

You're right about one thing - we're not testing opinions here. But we are conducting listening tests and then writing about our opinions. And where possible we also measure some results. Nowhere does anyone test scientifically whether one processor is better than another. You can test for noise floor and distortion and other things that one can if he chooses to conclude that it makes one a better sounding device than another. But it doesn't make it fact. That's why we also conduct listening tests. The more people the better. The more controlled the better. Still valuable to many either way. Not you sir or a few others. You NEED your numbers only to make your ears believe. Great. But repeating that's it's necessary in caps no matter how many times will not make it fact.

Btw, a listening test is a focus group. I used a focus group analogy to help you understand. Not germane.

Hope we're done here. You have your OPINION on the way you judge and recieve information regarding processor sound and comparisons, I have mine. And this forum and it's readers clearly enjoy both. The OP and some willing folks in this thread are proof of fact. So please end this debate so we can enjoy the results.

Looking forward to your findings gents. Love to be there. Understand the summer thing. Can you share what type of treatments you are discussing? Elements that you feel will make it a more equal listening test?

you, like all other humans, are subject to biases and also have the same auditory memory issues that everyone else has...

Sorry I felt the desire to address this as it's a mistake I believe many make in looking at this subject from a macro perspective.

It appears to suggest that we are all subject to the same variances in memory. As if memory is absolute for all people. Ie: all people have the exact same memory abilities. So one can't recall information better than another. Or that you can't improve your recollection of a memory by repeating it. Auditory memory is no different. It's simply a form of memory like visual memory.

When I perform a listening test I play a movie scene or tine over and over and over again - ingraining it in my auditory memory. Making it easier and more likely to detect subtleties.

Hypothetically, lets say you wrote two paragraphs exactly the same except for two small words somewhere in the middle. Then you give two groups of people who have never read the paragraph before a short amount of time to read them both quickly. I submit that some would notice the 2 word changes and some would not.

But if you gave the group the paragraph to study the night before then gave them the same test, I submit many more would notice the changes.

Listening tests used as proof that have been done in the past seem to play random different musical tunes on a system that the subjects are not used to listening to. So auditory memory will logically be weak. So its no surprise to me that the results are 50/50.

I submit that if one conducts a listening test where ALL the subjects listen to the first compared component on the exact system and in the exact seating position over and over and over again. Essentially engraining in their auditory memory. Then test the second component. I submit the results would be different. I'd like to see the listening tests be done this way. Then I'll buy the results.

Sorry I felt the desire to address this as it's a mistake I believe many make in looking at this subject from a macro perspective.

It appears to suggest that we are all subject to the same variances in memory. As if memory is absolute for all people. Ie: all people have the exact same memory abilities. So one can't recall information better than another. Or that you can't improve your recollection of a memory by repeating it. Auditory memory is no different. It's simply a form of memory like visual memory.

When I perform a listening test I play a movie scene or tine over and over and over again - ingraining it in my auditory memory. Making it easier and more likely to detect subtleties.

Hypothetically, lets say you wrote two paragraphs exactly the same except for two small words somewhere in the middle. Then you give two groups of people who have never read the paragraph before a short amount of time to read them both quickly. I submit that some would notice the 2 word changes and some would not.

But if you gave the group the paragraph to study the night before then gave them the same test, I submit many more would notice the changes.

Listening tests used as proof that have been done in the past seem to play random different musical tunes on a system that the subjects are not used to listening to. So auditory memory will logically be weak. So its no surprise to me that the results are 50/50.

I submit that if one conducts a listening test where ALL the subjects listen to the first compared component on the exact system and in the exact seating position over and over and over again. Essentially engraining in their auditory memory. Then test the second component. I submit the results would be different. I'd like to see the listening tests be done this way. Then I'll buy the results.

Except that the beauty, or failing depending how you want to look at it, of auditory memory that you're thinking of - long term memory - is a lossy process. It involves discarding information and depending how you focus, affects what's stored. And how you focus can be intimately tied to conscious and subconscious biases or considerations. In a way, it's almost like a poor mp3 software implementation that changes upon a myriad of factors unrelated to the actual program material.

Further, in order to make it to long term storage, the information has to be around long enough to do so. So, if it's subtle and of fleeting duration, it just might not make it there. Doesn't mean it's not real or important. In situations such as those, one is then placed in a situation where the actual listening session has to be frightfully short - seconds if you will - followed by the ability to time sync the next whatever (cable swap, component swap, whatever) in order to preserve the short term memory of whatever it was you were listening to.

I'm not sure I'd let TUC touch my toaster though.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House

I am going into this with the premise that, based on TUC's claims on the website, the differences are night and day. The difference between my 885 and 5508 is night and day. I expect that same difference between a stock and modded 885. Anything less than that, and TUC's claims are false.

In that, I am in disagreement with the owner of the modded gear. He has said that hours of comparison might be required to hear the differences, and even then they may not be noticed. I see that as inconsistent with David Shulte's claims, but I haven't pushed the issue.

As I mentioned before, we are still discussing how the tests will be done.

In that, I am in disagreement with the owner of the modded gear. He has said that hours of comparison might be required to hear the differences, and even then they may not be noticed. I see that as inconsistent with David Shulte's claims, but I haven't pushed the issue.

Course, they're all big enough to weather a few faux pas! Make sure you get the director's cut of Mars Needs Moms now!

I'm sure they did. As they likely tested the effect of red and yellow colors during the day and night, the Big Mac, combos, the iphone, ipad, Google maps, Google images etc etc. Successful corporations know the power of them. As i said before, focus groups aren't perfect. If the failure rate was near the success rate they wouldn't shell out millions. The larger the groups and better controlled they are the better. One mistake they make is trying to save money using a cheaper focus group company who might be inclined to put people in the room that really don't use the product and therefore skew the results - simply because it costs more to ensure the right people attend. Or using less people or the wrong test market to save money.

Just like we all are more interested in impressions here on this forum from folks who have more knowledge. And the more that say the same thing, the more likely it is to be true. I repeat, "likely". Not absolute.

kind of like the prophet retreating to the wilderness to ponder the meaning of life, no time limit can be placed on such a life changing task as scrutinizing prepros for for the minutest of "differences"...

weeks, nay months, may pass before those differences are revealed to the user..,

only those who truly persevere are finally rewarded by hearing those differences...

I'm sure they did. As they likely tested the effect of red and yellow colors during the day and night, the Big Mac, combos, the iphone, ipad, Google maps, Google images etc etc. Successful corporations know the power of them. As i said before, focus groups aren't perfect. If the failure rate was near the success rate they wouldn't shell out millions. The larger the groups and better controlled they are the better. One mistake they make is trying to save money using a cheaper focus group company who might be inclined to put people in the room that really don't use the product and therefore skew the results - simply because it costs more to ensure the right people attend. Or using less people or the wrong test market to save money.

Just like we all are more interested in impressions here on this forum from folks who have more knowledge. And the more that say the same thing, the more likely it is to be true. I repeat, "likely". Not absolute.

Haven't seen Mars needs Moms. Probably had a majority of bad reviews.

A big difference between focus groups and the audio comparison discussions is that companies in focus groups want to know how people will behave in a bias filled consumer world. Whether something is factually better is irrelevant, all they care about is that with an average person's biases will it sell better.

Whereas in these audio comparisons we are trying to deal with whether or not something factually provides better response, etc. etc. where biases remove the validity of a response.

focus group - biases are part of the equation and failingto consider them could lead to financial ruin

audio comparison - biases taint the response and make them completely suspect

To me it shouldn't take hours to listen to a specific modded component to know if it sounds better than the stock version. I just think no matter how the comparisons play out there will still be questions as to whole process. I think the only way to have any idea if TUC's claims are valid is to have a stock 885 on hand as well.

Maybe the best comparsion would be a TUC modded Oppo player and a stock Oppo. This way they can both be connected to the same prepro with duplicate CDs playing. Of course everything level matched. This would clearly show if TUCs claims of superior SQ from their modded players is in fact true or false. Shouldn't take that long of a listening session to figure that out IMO.

I am going into this with the premise that, based on TUC's claims on the website, the differences are night and day. The difference between my 885 and 5508 is night and day. I expect that same difference between a stock and modded 885. Anything less than that, and TUC's claims are false.

In that, I am in disagreement with the owner of the modded gear. He has said that hours of comparison might be required to hear the differences, and even then they may not be noticed. I see that as inconsistent with David Shulte's claims, but I haven't pushed the issue.

As I mentioned before, we are still discussing how the tests will be done.

Jeff

I guess that comes down to what is considered a night and day issue. I mentioned before "night and day" or "huge" type comments, I think, are sometimes (mis)used from the perspective of those little differences we seek in the high end realm. I don't hear a night and day difference between an $1800 Integra 9.8 processor and an $8000 classe processor. But I believe I have heard small differences. Like more robust or three dimensional sound, less tinny, and perhaps a touch better surround. Not night and day. But in that high end arena it might be referred to as night and day. Maybe because the price difference to get those subtle changes, I can confidently say are night and day.

That said, let us know if you guys hear any differences at all and fairly describe what you think they are. Are they the kind of differences (if positive improvements) that would best some of the high end processors DS claims they do. I realize that last statement is redonculous as it would be complete guesswork. I'm just trying to illustrate a thought. If the mods he has done have the subtle differences many pay the big dollars to get, then it would be worth spending $800 vs $6000 to get them for interested people. If there are any noticeable improvements at all, it may be worth looking into. But lets not split hairs over the wording. Let's just try to find out if his mods = improvements. And if so, descriptively how much and what they are. (In your opinions. Hopefully the group will have similar thoughts.)

Still doesn't say whether the changes add to the likelyhood of malfunction and that the manufacturer will void warranty. But then DS warranties it if you buy from him.

A big difference between focus groups and the audio comparison discussions is that companies in focus groups want to know how people will behave in a bias filled consumer world. Whether something is factually better is irrelevant, all they care about is that with an average person's biases will it sell better.

Whereas in these audio comparisons we are trying to deal with whether or not something factually provides better response, etc. etc. where biases remove the validity of a response.

focus group - biases are part of the equation and failingto consider them could lead to financial ruin

audio comparison - biases taint the response and make them completely suspect

Just my $0.02

Yes, but we all have subjective and bias listening preferences as well. You might test and find one processors noise floor is quieter and distortion level is better and still find 4 out of 5 people may feel in a listening test they prefer the other processor while watching movies. The specific tests you can scientifically make on a processor will not define whether one will be preferable to the masses or be deemed a "better sounding" processor scientifically over the other. So I don't see why people keep demanding them and claiming all other info is moot. In the case of processors, from that perspective all tests are moot.

To me it shouldn't take hours to listen to a specific modded component to know if it sounds better than the stock version. I just think no matter how the comparisons play out there will still be questions as to whole process. I think the only way to have any idea if TUC's claims are valid is to have a stock 885 on hand as well.

Maybe the best comparsion would be a TUC modded Oppo player and a stock Oppo. This way they can both be connected to the same prepro with duplicate CDs playing. Of course everything level matched. This would clearly show if TUCs claims of superior SQ from their modded players is in fact true or false. Shouldn't take that long of a listening session to figure that out IMO.

Bill

We have a stock Oppo 83, an Oppo 83 SE and a modded Oppo 83, however the mods are, IIRC, strictly in the analog outs and that is not relevant to the usage of any of us. We are digital connection guys.

Thats too bad. But if I recall DS claims better PQ with his modded 83SE. So maybe he is claiming better digital SQ as well.

Bill

DS also claims a more noticeable difference in the processor mods than the Oppo. So to determine if his mods can make an improvement or not, it stands to reason that you test the component it would be easiest to detect. if you can't determine the difference in the processor then the Oppo will be no argument.

I have to wonder why some folks are more interested in outing DS as a Charleton over proving his mods work. As a consumer, I have nothing to gain if DS's mods make no difference. If I bought his mods and was angry because I felt ripped off after testing the difference I could understand. But I haven't heard from anyone on thus forum that that us the case. If his mods do make the improvements I have lots to gain. For $800 I could get the sound I've been wishing for instead of having to pay $6000. As well, it would force the big companies to make more affordable better sounding gear. It would also show that they are the charletons who charge 90% more for 10% improvement in sound. Don't get me wrong. I don't know if his mods work or don't. I haven't heard or tested them so I rightfully have no opinion one way or the other.

I just want the truth about his mods as I'm no fan of wasting money. But I know which way I hope it works out.

If one hasn't heard his mods and is just lusting for blood, there are much bigger charletons to put energy into. Like our broken political system more intent on being in the white house and favoring the uber rich than working for the people.

Unless you are paid by one of the big companies to comment in these forums. Then at least I understand. It's your job and it's a free country where it's okay for big business to take advantage of people.

Otherwise it seems best to just find out and test as fairly and open minded as you can.

DS also claims a more noticeable difference in the processor mods than the Oppo. So to determine if his mods can make an improvement or not, it stands to reason that you test the component it would be easiest to detect. if you can't determine the difference in the processor then the Oppo will be no argument.

DS makes a lot of claims. Trying to do a comparison between prepros is not easy unless you have some form of switching to do a direct A-B comparison. The reason why I suggested the Oppo was that you can do a direct A-B comparison much easier than with a prepro.

Quote:

I have to wonder why some folks are more interested in outing DS as a Charleton over proving his mods work.

To be quite honest the two go hand in hand wouldn't you think.

Quote:

As a consumer, I have nothing to gain if DS's mods make no difference. If I bought his mods and was angry because I felt ripped off after testing the difference I could understand. But I haven't heard from anyone on thus forum that that us the case. If his mods do make the improvements I have lots to gain. For $800 I could get the sound I've been wishing for instead of having to pay $6000. As well, it would force the big companies to make more affordable better sounding gear. It would also show that they are the charletons who charge 90% more for 10% improvement in sound. Don't get me wrong. I don't know if his mods work or don't. I haven't heard or tested them so I rightfully have no opinion one way or the other.

I for one am not going to spend the money or the time to prove or disapprove DS's claims. I strongly believe if TUC's modded components were as good as DS claims there would be much more discussion about it than what you read here on AVS. At least when you but a $6K processor you know what you are getting and can remove the cover to look at the inside without losing your warranty.

Quote:

I just want the truth about his mods as I'm no fan of wasting money. But I know which way I hope it works out.

If you want the truth why not have your processor modded by TUC?

Quote:

If one hasn't heard his mods and is just lusting for blood, there are much bigger charletons to put energy into. Like our broken political system more intent on being in the white house and favoring the uber rich than working for the people.

I guess the members here on AVS figured they would start small and take DS to the task. Then maybe move onto political system and the white house.

Quote:

Otherwise it seems best to just find out and test as fairly and open minded as you can.

I am going into this with the premise that, based on TUC's claims on the website, the differences are night and day. The difference between my 885 and 5508 is night and day. I expect that same difference between a stock and modded 885. Anything less than that, and TUC's claims are false.

In that, I am in disagreement with the owner of the modded gear. He has said that hours of comparison might be required to hear the differences, and even then they may not be noticed. I see that as inconsistent with David Shulte's claims, but I haven't pushed the issue.

As I mentioned before, we are still discussing how the tests will be done.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

I do not think that it would take hours to hear differences between the stock and upgraded 885 but I do believe that it could take some time for the listener (s) to become acclimated to be able to recognize differences. Differences may be extremely difficult to recognize with some recordings or portions of some recordings. As with all listening sessions, it is a matter of the ability of the listener to note and recognize differences. Not everyone either has the experience or the ability to hear differences. Much of this can come from a conscious effort and to know what to look for to hear differences. Also, as I and others have mentioned many times it is and will be difficult to make comparisons in the sound of Pre/Pros be they an 885 stock or otherwise as well as the 5508. When making these comparisons Audessey must be turned off as well because you would be comparing the capabilities of this software unless you could have both units identically calibrated.

Additionally, as I have indicated everyone uses a different yardstick to describe how much difference is actually noted. What one person may indicate as a night and day difference may be considered as only a minor or subtle change to another. Also, as we have discussed I had suggested that with the stock units such as the Onkyo 5508 and the Oppo 83SE we may be about 75 or 80% of what is possible. As we discussed to get that extra 20 or 25% of what is possible it can be quite costly as we get to an asymptotic curve.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pepar

We have a stock Oppo 83, an Oppo 83 SE and a modded Oppo 83, however the mods are, IIRC, strictly in the analog outs and that is not relevant to the usage of any of us. We are digital connection guys.

We do have a stock 885 ...

Jeff

Jeff,

The upgrades to the Oppo 83SE or the NuForce Edition of the Opp 83SE is on both the analog and the digital sides of the machine. In the case of the changes to the machine by both Oppo and by NuForce between the Oppo 83 and the Oppo 83SE and the NuForce Edition of the Oppo 83SE this work is done exclusively to the best of my knowledge for only the analog side of the machine.

Also, and I do not want to make much of this, when Craig came back to my home and we had taken readings of the room (which has led to adding additional Acoustic Room treatments) and had run Audessey correctly for my upgraded Onkyo 885 and made some adjustments we sat and did some additional listening to my system. Granted, the room is different and so are the acoustic room treatments, the amps are different, the wiring and racks are different, the speakers and subwoofers are different, the Onkyo 885 was upgraded and so was the NuForce Edition Oppo 83SE. We listened to some cuts on CD both with my upgraded Denon 5910CI with my upgraded Lavry DA10 DAC as well as the upgraded NuForce Edition Oppo 83SE through the upgraded Lavry DA10 DAC as well as the upgraded NuForce Edition Oppo 83SE directly into the upgraded Onkyo 885. Craig was of the opinion that with the analog inputs the upgraded Lavry DA10 definitely improved the sound of either unit into the upgraded Onkyo 885 but he may have preferred (but wasn't sure at the time) of the upgraded Oppo directly into the upgraded Lavry DA10 DAC. As I recall for the playback of some of the material, including Foreplay Craig had indicated that he had never heard these tracks sound so good with either the analog (through the upgraded Lavry DA10 DAC) or direct digital inputs through HDMI into the upgraded Onkyo.

Thats too bad. But if I recall DS claims better PQ with his modded 83SE. So maybe he is claiming better digital SQ as well.

Bill

Bill, these in response to a question from Amir re: the following claim on the TUC site: "Video looks washed out, no depth of field, and grainy in comparison....The Upgrade Company specializes in improving audio and video components by upgrading to the finest electronic parts, wiring and shielding available."

Appears to be non-specific to the Oppo.

Quote:

Amir, the video improvements that result from higher cost parts, the installation of shielding and dampening are numerous. Noise levels both percieved and measured, black gradations and black levels improve, color saturation, depth of field, etc. Clients are very surprised as I'm sure you'd be.

Amir yes our upgrade dramatically improves the video and audio performance over HDMI. Marantz, Onkyo, Integra and other modestly priced A/V prepro's for example actually surpass the performance of stock expensive prepro's such as the $9000 Classe SSP-800 and $12,000 Mcintosh MX-150 for example. The proprietary & trade secret application of shielding & shielding parts that have never been used by any audio or video manufacturer until we started. There is no manufacturer doing what we're doing, and it produces very large improvements in video as well as audio performance. That's why we can offer a 100% Buy Back Gaurantee. The improvement is so large customers are more then just satisfied......

DS makes a lot of claims. Trying to do a comparison between prepros is not easy unless you have some form of switching to do a direct A-B comparison. The reason why I suggested the Oppo was that you can do a direct A-B comparison much easier than with a prepro.

I do understand that, Bill. My statement about folks being more interested in proving DS to be a charlatan over coming at it from a neutral perspective was not meant to be pointed in your direction. My mistake for placing it after your Oppo suggestion. I apologize for the understandable interpretation. It's just that your suggestion made me think about those that could be.

To be quite honest the two go hand in hand wouldn't you think.

Not necessarily. If the tester or subject set-up and perform the test with a bias either way in mind, it could effect the results. ie: if the tester wanted to see no difference because either he as already made-up his mind or because he's writing in forums to protect large manufacturers, then he could decide to compare components like the Oppos with less noticeable difference. Thereby increasing the likely-hood for differences to be detected. On the flip side, a guy might hear a difference in SQ and claim it's an improvement, where maybe it was just different. And he might overemphasize the improvement because his desire skews it that way. I'm not saying that's what will happen. Or suggesting that was your intent to suggest the Oppo. I'm saying that not coming at it from a neutral standpoint in as fair and unbiased blind test as possible will not give us the best results one way or the other.

I for one am not going to spend the money or the time to prove or disapprove DS's claims. I strongly believe if TUC's modded components were as good as DS claims there would be much more discussion about it than what you read here on AVS. At least when you but a $6K processor you know what you are getting and can remove the cover to look at the inside without losing your warranty.

I don't disagree. If I had $9000 to play with, I'd be buying a $9000 processor. And tossing it for the next great upgrade in 2 years. If I had $9000 to play with. However, if I had much more to play with, I think I might be funding and conducting these comparisons with groups on this forum because I would enjoy it.

If you want the truth why not have your processor modded by TUC?

Couple of reasons. I emailed/spoke with DS to get a sense of his business/customer attitude and a gut feeling for the guy. In all honestly, it wasn't the experienced I had hoped for. No comparison to a chat with a guy like Pete at HSU. But I couldn't get a gut feeling on the claims. Since I'm not a fan of wasting money including return shipping costs and the effort it would take to take apart my media room to get at the components, I've been researching the net for info and any A/B comparisons, since. Another reason is I have the Integra 9.8 and DS's suggestion was to get the modded 5508 over modding the 9.8 as it [insert DS lingo re substantial improvement]. That option interested me most because it also gives me XT32. But then I'd never know if the extra $$ I'd pay over the stock 5508 made any difference. And it would void the manufacturers warranty and could potentially increase malfunction. So without an A/B comparison of my own or from some seemingly trusted forum users, I'm unwilling to spend $2800. And to be honest, I'm not sold on the stock 5508 because I'm not sure it will fill the void i've been wanting in SQ. It may fulfill some areas, but I'm not sold on all of them. Especially the thin, digital sound I want improved.

I guess the members here on AVS figured they would start small and take DS to the task. Then maybe move onto political system and the white house.

Thank goodness. Someone needs to. Otherwise there'll be few left to afford processors. Too bad more people didn't research the net about what is too easily spoon fed to them by the TV and Newspapers. If a restaurant owner makes bad food, I would eat there just because the pretty server gives me the food.

Again step right up and give DS a call to have your prepro modded.

By the way you have an awesome looking HT room there.

Thanks. I'm fairly happy with their looks on their limited budget. I would have done more with more. Hidden rears, more treatments, etc. But had to put the brakes on after my wife discovered the floating floor material I took a lunch off to secretly haul into the basement. But both rooms sound even better than they look. mmm, well my proceed amp went into protective mode a few weeks ago, so I'm now using my Anthem MCA5 for all channels. Not happy. Too bright again. The repair of the HPA3 is another grey area to deal with.

I do understand that, Bill. My statement about folks being more interested in proving DS to be a charlatan over coming at it from a neutral perspective was not meant to be pointed in your direction. My mistake for placing it after your Oppo suggestion. I apologize for the understandable interpretation. It's just that your suggestion made me think about those that could be.

No problem at all, no need to apologize.

Quote:

Couple of reasons. I emailed/spoke with DS to get a sense of his business/customer attitude and a gut feeling for the guy. In all honestly, it wasn't the experienced I had hoped for. No comparison to a chat with a guy like Pete at HSU. But I couldn't get a gut feeling on the claims. Since I'm not a fan of wasting money including return shipping costs and the effort it would take to take apart my media room to get at the components, I've been researching the net for info and any A/B comparisons, since. Another reason is I have the Integra 9.8 and DS's suggestion was to get the modded 5508 over modding the 9.8 as it [insert DS lingo re substantial improvement]. That option interested me most because it also gives me XT32. But then I'd never know if the extra $$ I'd pay over the stock 5508 made any difference. And it would void the manufacturers warranty and could potentially increase malfunction. So without an A/B comparison of my own or from some seemingly trusted forum users, I'm unwilling to spend $2800. And to be honest, I'm not sold on the stock 5508 because I'm not sure it will fill the void i've been wanting in SQ. It may fulfill some areas, but I'm not sold on all of them. Especially the thin, digital sound I want improved.

I have never spoken with DS but my thoughts from his claims on the TUC site is one of self promotion and not much if any factual information. I think you are smart to not buy the 5508 and then send it to TUC to be modded. I could never understand for a second why someone would send a brand new component to a company like TUC to be modded without ever listening to it in its stock form. How would one know if the component sounds better or possibly that it might sound worse.